Alternatives to browsers (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
simonstl at simonstl.com
Wed Jan 19 16:00:34 GMT 2000
At 10:14 AM 1/19/00 +0000, Miles Sabin wrote:
>XML encoding gets you a common generic format, but it doesn't
>get you semantic transparency. So, sure, you'd be able to
>parse the contents of XML rpc packets, but that doesn't mean
>you'll be able to do anything interesting with them.
It's true that semantic transparency is one of those holy grails that
haven't yet been reached.
On the other hand, transforming XML from flavor to flavor is a lot easier
(in my experience) than transforming binary streams. You might want to
check out JXML's Quick (http://www.jxml.com) for one approach that's
keeping this capability in mind.
XML buys you flexibility.
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
More information about the Xml-dev